On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:15 PM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > Bruce Perens scripsit: > >> So, what the Artistic License 1.0 made much more difficult for the >> poor Open Source developer is exactly what I'd like to fix. And yet >> the Artistic 1.0 is not the one I thought of first upon seeing this >> discussion in progress. We have much worse. > > Please itemize.
I don't think we do anyone any favors by having extensive public discussions of the legal/drafting weaknesses of existing licenses, so please don't. The point stands that some licenses are poorly drafted, and that in a perfect world where we could easily identify and evaluate such licenses, we would probably no longer publicize/endorse them. That said, as Richard pointed out, this is an extremely difficult issue to evaluate. It is inherently subjective, and a matter requiring expertise. Given that, I see no evidence that OSI (or anyone) could perform it in a reasonable, objective, efficient manner, so I'm not very interested in pursuing it. Luis _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
